On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 5:20 AM, Helmut Hartl <helmut.hartl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > we are currently evaluating different options for group communication > and HA features for our software. > > The statements regarding pure opensource and BSD licence sound very > interresting to us, and also the list of supported systems. > > While failing (quick try) to build corosync on OSX Lion 10.7.4 > (libqb fails to compile for corosync 2.0.1, corosync 1.4.3 fails > with unknown linker options (osx has unfortunately > moved away from pure gcc)). libqb was building for me on OSX recently. Did you grab the very latest from git? > > We also had no luck on Illumos/Openindiana 151a4, which would > be our main platform. > > So it seems that sadly currently corosync is not working out of > the box for the systems we tried - But before we start to invest > time to try to fix things ourselves I would like to ask if > a) Supporting the above mentioned platforms is wanted, > so that patches are accepted ? > and > b) Is the dependency on libqb (which is licenced LPGL) mandatory/planned ? I believe it is mandatory. As for the license, you'd have to talk to Angus. I don't know why he chose that one, maybe he's flexible. > > The webpage suggested no dependencies at all, and I did not > find a quick answer. > > The reason i ask is that our commercial software is going > to be released under a New BSD style licence too, some tools are > linked statically and this dependency would not fit in our plans. > > Thank you, > > helmut > _______________________________________________ > discuss mailing list > discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
